It's kind of a self-aware, almost meta-humorous type of joke, because it's sort of a game between the writer and the audience -- see if they can set up something and find a creative way to contradict it in the very next moment -- and because it often depends on something happening oh-so-conveniently on cue, as in the above joke. When it works, it works really well, though.
Weinman wrote about it last year, and posted a great example from Mary Tyler Moore, and the incomparable Ted Knight. This is a great lesson for Comedy writers. I actually use appreciation for the Stan Daniels Turn as a litmus test for writers, directors, and network people.
Audiences love the Stan Daniels Turn. It's a really satisfying joke when executed right. And I've been in lots of meetings where directors, network people, and other writers pooh-pooh it. Because they're too good for the Stan Daniels Turn, you see.
I call these people, "people who do not understand comedy." When I am handed power, they will be shunned in accordance with the laws of the tribe.
Thanks, Weinman, for allowing me to skate through another day by glomming onto another's work.
Um...It's homage?
3 comments:
Is it "glomming"? That's weird. I always thought it was "glombing." I always thought I heard a silent "b" in there. Hmmm. Nope, I just checked it online and you're right it is "glom".
Anyhoo. Sorry. You were saying?
So many turns, rules, lessons, references, litmus tests...the pressure!
wow. how could you not appreciate something so simple yet so consistently funny? too populist? this type of joke has been used so much it should be cliche. but every time i hear the set-up for one--you almost always see it coming--i can't help but laugh BEFORE i hear the punch.
Post a Comment